MYSURU: India's September 29 cross-LOC strike was conducted professionally, as expected of the apolitical army of the Indian Republic. Pakistan's predictable response is denial of its ever having happened.
It could have been left at that, but the government and the opposition (such as it is), encouraged by TRP-hungry TV channels provoking certain publicity-hungry military veterans, have been using the apolitical army's professionalism to make political or personal capital of the success of the operation, thus stoking war hysteria among a vocal minority.
More specifically, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar stated that it was he who enabled the Army to realize its own power and capability. Further, notwithstanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi discouraging chest-thumping over the success of the strike, Parrikar is freely indulging in it, even suggesting that enlargement of the conflict is possible.
Somewhat more worrying is the fact that USIBC (US-India Business Council) sees “tremendous [business] opportunity” for USA's military-industrial corporations, as tensions heighten between India and Pakistan. Whether or not India and Pakistan are presently economically or logistically capable of entering into even a short war (as in 1965, 1971 or 1999), the assurance of business in military hardware is being surreptitiously ensured.
In addition, there is sufficient unfortunate precedent for countries entering into war or conflict simply to divert public attention from domestic problems, and India and Pakistan (and US and China too) presently have that motivation.
Chinese artfulness overshadowed PM Modi's “jhula diplomacy” at Sabarmati soon after he had assumed charge as PM. Even as the two sipped tea, Chinese troops were intruding into India near Depsang la in Ladakh, and most of PoK's Gilgit was already occupied by Chinese PLA troops.
PM Modi's 2016 Independence Day mention of Pakistan's problems in Balochistan, followed by an important Balochi seeking asylum in India, and most recently a Balochi “official” proposing creation of a Balochi government-in-exile in India, has clearly turned China more openly against India, because its CPEC terminates in Gwadar port on Balochistan's Arabian Sea coast.
Some strategic thinkers suggest that India “taking on” Pakistan actually amounts to challenging China, thus opening our northern and eastern fronts in addition to our western front with Pakistan. It must be recalled that with the Lhasa railway in operation, China has excellent logistic support for its military already deployed on India's Tibetan border, within comfortable missile range of India's populous heartland cities. Further, we must not fail to note that when India proposed reworking the Indus Water Treaty to “punish” Pakistan, China immediately brought up its control over Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra) waters to effectively kill the proposal.
India had drawn close to USA with PM Manmohan Singh's initiative for strategic partnership with successive US presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama, when LEMOA and CISMOA, both of military importance, were proposed. There being no substantive difference between the (essentially neoliberal) strategic-economic outlooks of the NDA-1, UPA-1 & 2, and NDA-2 governments, today these two Agreements are on the verge of being operationalized. This has worsened India-China relations.
Pakistan peevishly demanded similar “treatment” from the US. All this has driven the Pakistani State – the present elected government ostensibly in the driving seat, but with the steering wheel, accelerator and clutch-and-gears controlled by its army – ever closer to China, which has over the years provided it nuclear technology, weapon-delivery systems and hardware.
A section of India's electronic media has sought to humiliate Pakistan by tom-tomming the eminently successful September 29 cross-LOC strike, even as India has launched a diplomatic offensive to isolate Pakistan in the international community. With East Pakistan gone (1971) and Balochistan – 40% of its land area – now “on the block”, Pakistan feels threatened and cornered, but is predictably defiant in the warmth of China's support.
India's choice of close (albeit subordinate) strategic partnership with the US has alienated both China and Russia, which have been moving closer together because of the common threat represented by the US in the Pacific and NATO in Europe.
Pakistan is moving closer to both China and Russia, and the strategic lines are being drawn more clearly. At the same time, India-Pakistan relations are in a tail-spin, with India talking about Balochistan while Pakistan talks of the Kashmir unrest, and both beat war drums.
With terror-exporter Pakistan effectively run by its India-hating military-ISI combine, and badly hit by its own Frankenstein monster on the one hand, and a strongly right-wing government in India embattled by a make-or-break political situation at home on the other hand, the sub-continent appears close to escalation of military hostilities, possibly even war.
By talking at each other rather than with each other, India and Pakistan are doing what can only profit military-industrial corporations which manufacture and supply military hardware, and smell business opportunity in the deaths and wounds of the inevitable victims of war.
War is the product of forces in the international political stratosphere, caused by default or design of politicians, and prosecuted by generals who are far from the battle-fronts.
Battles are fought by middle-rank and junior officers, JCOs and soldiers, who are the primary casualties. No soldier of any country in his right senses wants war, even if he trains and prepares assiduously for it, and proudly rises to the occasion like the Indian officers and soldiers have repeatedly done.
The common citizen of every country wants peace and social tranquility, not war.
But today, the Indian sub-continent is teetering on the edge of war. It is therefore the crying need of the hour for all right-thinking citizens in India and Pakistan to speak up and prevail upon their respective governments to de-escalate tensions and begin talks, rein in the war-mongering sections of the media and the public, and initiate appropriate diplomatic measures without, at the same time, lowering the military guard.
This is eminently doable if military efficiency and prowess is not subordinated to domestic or international political expediency. As far as India is concerned, “NO WAR” should be the opening mantra if we want peace and development according to “sab ka saath, sab ka vikas”, coined by PM Modi.
(Major General S.G. Vombatkere, VSM, retired as Additional DG Discipline & Vigilance in Army HQ AG's Branch.)